Mentoring Needs and Preferences in Swiss Medical Education and Practice: A Cross- Sectional Study

Mentoring Needs and Preferences in Swiss Medical Education and Practice: A Cross- Sectional Study | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Mentoring Needs and Preferences in Swiss Medical Education and Practice: A Cross- Sectional Study Julia Alessandra Holtmann, Jan-Friso Beck, Julia Hegy, Moritz Tannast, and 1 more This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-8185446/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Background Structured mentoring can support career development, well-being, and equality in medicine. However, many studies report limited access to mentoring opportunities. Therefore, this study investigates current mentoring availability, the demand for structured programs, and the openness toward digital mentoring offers in the Swiss medical field. Methods A national cross-sectional online survey was conducted between November 2024 and March 2025 via REDCap. The participants included medical students and physicians at various stages of their careers. Mentoring experience, interest in structured mentoring, preferred mentoring topics, and openness to a digital platform were assessed. Descriptive statistics and subgroup analyses were performed. Results A total of 548 participants completed the survey. Among them, 89.6% perceived the current mentoring availability as insufficient, and 89.2% expressed strong interest in structured mentoring programs. Thematic needs were diverse, with an average of 5.3 of 11 desired mentoring topics per participant. The most frequently selected topics were career planning, general mentoring, specialization, education and research possibilities and specialty choice. Demand was consistent across gender, age, and professional level. A digital solution was considered to be useful by 79.6% of the participants, with higher acceptance among younger and female respondents. Conclusion This study confirms a substantial gap between mentoring needs and current offerings in Switzerland. There is a clear demand for structured programs and broad support for digital mentoring solutions. The implementation of accessible, structured, and theme-diverse mentoring—potentially using digital platforms—may help address this unmet need in the medical community. Mentoring Education Medica Surveys Cross-Sectiona Studies Switzerland Work-lif balance Caree choice Burnout Professional Networking Figures Figure 1 Introduction Mentorship, a concept that originated in ancient Greece, has evolved within academia as a practice focused on guiding and influencing individual careers through role modeling, resource sharing, networking, and advice [ 1 ]. Today, mentoring is seen as a supportive relationship in which more advanced individuals share their knowledge and experiences to help less experienced persons grow personally and professionally [ 2 ]. Even though mentoring can occur in many forms, general mentoring is considered a relationship where the mentee has a person to talk to about career planning, experiences and problems that arise within or due to their field of work. Especially in medicine, mentoring is increasingly recognized as important, as it has been shown to positively influence career development, confidence, overall job satisfaction as well as professional and personal growth of both mentor and mentee [ 2 – 7 ]. In medicine, where young professionals often face high workloads and emotional strain, leading to feelings of being overwhelmed and increased dropout rates, mentoring has proven to be especially valuable [ 3 ]. In addition to enhancing clinical knowledge, research productivity, and engagement, mentoring has also been shown to mitigate burnout and reduce feelings of isolation [ 3 , 8 ]. Although various mentorship models have been proposed and recognized as key elements of professional development in academic medicine, their implementation remains inconsistent [ 8 – 11 ]. Formal mentoring structures are often lacking, and access to effective mentorships is unequally distributed [ 12 , 13 ]. Typical implementation barriers include a limited pool of qualified mentors, potential imbalances related to gender or ethnic dynamics, a lack of institutional support and time constraints [ 7 , 14 ]. Studies have reported gender and ethnic differences in access to mentoring, with men being more likely to receive mentorship and to reporting positive career impacts from these relationships [ 12 , 13 , 15 ]. Within the Swiss medical education system, which spans undergraduate to postgraduate training, approximately 12,000 medical students are distributed over seven universities across Switzerland, and 14,573 residents were in training in 2024 [ 16 ]. Insufficient guidance and mentorship during these formative years have consistently been identified as major factors that negatively influence career progression in medicine [ 6 ]. In cases where no structured mentoring was offered or taken up, more cases of burnout among medical staff were reported 20, [ 17 ]. Even though clear longitudinal data are still lacking, existing surveys show a heightened trend toward job turnover and an increased intent to leave patient care worldwide. [ 18 ],[ 17 ]. According to a Swiss wide survey, 30% of medical students are considering a reorientation of their profession due to their high workload and questionable work-life balance [ 19 ]. In particular, first-year doctors report untenable and highly strenuous working conditions, that result in poor mental health and high attrition rates [ 20 ]. Furthermore, recent studies suggest that strong mentorship relationship may serve as a protective factor against burnout in preclinical medical students [ 11 , 21 ]. However, despite its widely acknowledged benefits, formal mentoring programs remain inconsistently implemented across academic medicine, both internationally and in Switzerland [ 6 , 21 , 22 ]. International studies have shown that fewer than 40% of medical students report having a mentor, with physician-scientists more often involved in mentoring than purely clinical practitioners [ 23 ]. These findings align with a study conducted in Austria, Germany and Switzerland reporting that only 36% of medical students have access to mentoring [ 24 ]. Methods Aim of the study The aim of this study is to quantify the availability of and degree of satisfaction with mentoring among Swiss medical students and physicians, and to assess the demand for structured mentoring as well as the perceived usefulness of a digital application to facilitate access. Considering the current literature we hypothesized that exposure to mentoring remains limited, that most students and physicians desire structured mentoring opportunities, and that a mobile application would be viewed as a helpful mechanism to improve access. Survey instrument and variables We constructed a de novo online survey using Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap), a secure, web-based data collection platform [25]. The survey, developed in collaboration with Learning and Development at the University of Bern, contained 18 questions. The following areas were assessed: personal demographics, professional characteristics, own experiences with mentoring, own need for mentoring and personally relevant aspects of mentoring. The entire survey including all answer options can be seen in supplemental table 1. Survey sample and recruitment The study sample included two target populations: (1) medical students currently enrolled in a Swiss medical faculty and (2) physicians working in Switzerland, either in hospitals or in private practices. Physicians across all specialties, subspecialties, and career levels (residents, attending physicians, and senior consultants) were eligible to participate. A comprehensive national recruitment strategy was implemented to ensure wide and diverse participation. All seven Swiss medical faculties were contacted and invited to disseminate the survey through institutional mailing lists and internal communications. These faculties included the University of Basel, Bern, Geneva, Lausanne, Zurich, Università della Svizzera Italiana (USI, Lugano), and ETH Zurich (Bachelor program in Human Medicine, in collaboration with the University of Zurich and University Hospital Zurich). To reach medical students and young physicians, the Swiss Medical Students’ Association (SWIMSA) and the Association of Swiss Assistant and Senior Physicians (VSAO) were engaged to support dissemination via newsletters, social media posts, and internal platforms. The survey was also shared by the Swiss Medical Association (FMH) and numerous Swiss professional specialty societies (e.g. Swiss Orthopedics, Swiss Society of Internal Medicine, Swiss Society of Surgery), who were asked to distribute the survey among their members. Participants were recruited through multiple channels, including email invitations, printed flyers with QR codes posted in hospitals and university buildings, and social media posts on LinkedIn, Instagram, and Facebook. Survey administration Recruitment took place between November 2024 and March 2025. We sent 4 survey reminders and closed the survey by the end of March 2025 with a total of 672 responses. Our sample size is considered sufficient for national cross-sectional survey research in medical education, allowing for subgroup analyses and reliable insights across demographics and career levels [26, 27]. Ethics approval and consent to participate This study involved an anonymous survey without collection of health-related personal data and therefore does not fall under the Swiss Human Research Act (HFG); no submission to the Cantonal Ethics Committee was required. All participants were informed about the purpose of the study and provided electronic informed consent prior to beginning the questionnaire. No financial or material incentives were offered. Statistical analysis Descriptive statistics were calculated to summarize participant demographics, mentoring experience, and interest in structured mentoring programs. Frequencies and percentages were reported for categorical variables, whereas means, standard deviations, medians, and modes were reported for continuous or ordinal variables where appropriate. Group comparisons were conducted using via chi-square tests for categorical data and Mann–Whitney U tests for nonparametric ordinal comparisons. A one-sample t-test was used to compare mentoring satisfaction ratings against the neutral midpoint. To assess associations between key variables such as mentoring experience, the importance of mentoring, and app acceptance, correlation analyses (Pearson’s or Spearman’s as appropriate) were performed. Binomial tests were used to assess differences in proportions against hypothesized benchmarks (e.g. 50%). An alternative interest index (0-3) was created, combining three generally answered variables: expectation of professional improvement through mentoring programs, high perceived importance of mentoring programs (score≥ 4), and willingness to participate as a mentor. Correlations between the three variables were further examined via Pearson 2-tailed correlation calculations. All six resulting correlation values were significant at either the 0.05 level or at the 0.01 level. All the statistical tests were two-tailed with a significant level of p < 0.05. Data analysis was performed using IBM SPSS Statistics (Version 31). Results Participant characteristics A total of 548 participants provided complete demographic data (Table 1). Most respondents were aged 25–38 years (46%), and 62.5% identified as female. Most participants reported German as their primary language (86.6%), followed by French (9.5%), English (2.7%), and Italian (1.1%). The participants represented all career stages, with 30.3% medical students, 19.1% residents, and 25.5% senior physicians or above. The most common medical specialties were internal medicine (24.7%), anesthesiology (16.5%), and orthopedics and trauma surgery (13.4%). Most participants were located in Bern (70%), followed by Zürich (6%) and other cantons (24%). Among the students, the largest proportion were enrolled at the University of Bern (28.7%), followed by ETH Zürich (21.3%) and the University of Fribourg (15.9%; Table 1). Table 1 . Demographic and professional characteristics of the participants (n = 548) Variable Category N % Age Group 44 107 19.5 Gender Female 337 62.5 Male 198 36.7 Diverse/Other 2 0.4 No response 11 2.0 Language German 473 86.6 French 52 9.5 Italian 6 1.1 English 15 2.7 Professional Status Medical students 165 30.28 Residents 104 19.08 Senior residents without completed specialization (FMH) 34 6.24 Senior residents with completed specialization (FMH) 41 7.52 Deputy senior physican 62 11.38 Senior physician and above 139 25.5 Specialization Internal medicine 92 24.7 Anesthesiology 61 16.5 Orthopedics and trauma surgery 50 13.4 Others 159 45.4 Locations and workplaces (canton) Bern 263 70.1 Zürich 22 5.9 Others 90 24 University University of Bern 47 28.7 ETH Zürich 35 21.3 University of Fribourg 26 15.9 Others 56 34.1 Mentoring Experience and Satisfaction: Insufficient Availability of Mentoring Programs in Switzerland Among the 530 valid responses, only 32.5% had previous mentoring experience. Among those, satisfaction has been shown to be significantly above neutral (mean = 3.44/5; SD = 1.217; t (162) = 9.812; p < 0.001), with 55.8% rating their experience as positive. Overall, 89.6% considered existing mentoring opportunities to be insufficient, whereas only 10.4% perceived existing mentoring possibilities as being sufficient ( p < 0.001, binomial test). Importantly, 94.5% of all the respondents expected mentoring to potentially have a positive impact on their career. The participants with mentoring experience rated the importance of mentoring higher than did those without (80.0% vs. 69.2%, p < 0.001). The perception of insufficient mentoring was consistent across all professional roles and genders. Women tended to rate availability more critically than men (92.1% vs. 86.8%, p = 0.054). Mentoring importance was positively correlated with perceived benefit ( r = .25, p < .01) and willingness to mentor ( r = .14, p < .01). Mentoring Needs: Most preferred Topic of Mentoring Programs is Career Advice Interest in mentoring programs was consistently high across all professional roles, genders, and age categories. Chi-square analyses revealed no statistically significant differences between professional groups (χ²(5) = 6.424, p = 0.267; Gamma = –0.023). A nonsignificant tendency towards greater interest among female respondents was observed (χ²(1) = 2.770, p = 0.096, φ = –0.072), whereas no age effect was found (χ²(1) = 0.002, p = 0.961, φ = –0.002). For example, high interest was reported among both medical students (87.9%) and senior physicians (85.6%), as were intermediate career levels. A significant association was found between the perceived importance of mentoring and both its expected benefit (r = 0.25, p < 0.01) and willingness to mentor (r = 0.14, p < 0.01). The analyses revealed two topics with significant group differences, thus p < .05. Across all career stages, career advice and research opportunities emerged as the most frequently desired mentoring topics. Interest in career advice was particularly high among residents (80.2%) and specialists (79.7%) compared with students (69.6%; χ² = 8.31, p = .016). Similarly, demand for mentoring on research possibilities increased with seniority (44.3% of students, 49.4% of residents, and 57.0% of specialists; χ² = 7.69, p = .019). Other topics—such as education/specialization, networking, clinical skills, and work–life balance—showed no significant differences between groups (p > .05), suggesting broadly shared mentoring needs across career levels (Figure 1 A–D and table 2). Table 2. Differences in mentoring topics interest across all career levels Mentoring topic Medical students (n = 309) Residents (n = 81) Senior residents and above (n = 207) χ² p Career advice 69.6% 80.2% 79.7% 8.31 .016* General mentoring 61.2% 56.8% 60.9% 0.54 .765 Research possibilities 44.3% 49.4% 57.0% 7.96 .019* Education/specialization 56.6% 55.6% 50.7% 1.79 .408 Networking 47.6% 50.6% 56.0% 3.56 .169 Clinical skills 51.5% 50.6% 45.4% 1.88 .390 Work-Life balance 42.7% 39.5% 44.4% 0.59 .746 Fellowships 37.9% 46.9% 45.4% 3.95 .139 Profession and family 35.0% 38.3% 37.2% 0.45 .799 Reorientation 21.0% 24.7% 29.5% 4.77 .092 Preferred Mentoring Format: Flexible and Digital A significant difference in mentoring preferences was found across professional groups (χ²(5) = 12.7, p = 0.026), with the preference for structured mentoring increasing with seniority—from 25% among medical students to nearly 50% among deputy senior physicians. No gender differences were observed (p = 0.50; Table 3). Among all participants, 79.6% considered a mentoring app to be potentially useful. App acceptance was significantly greater among younger (86.0% vs. 74.6%, p = 0.001) and female participants, than among male participants (84.7% vs. 70.2%, p < 0.001). The younger participants were those aged under 35 years, and the older participants were those aged 35 years and older. Higher professional status has been shown to be a negative predictor of acceptance of a digital approach. Participants without prior mentoring experience showed greater app acceptance than those with experience (83.4% vs. 71.6%, p = 0.001). Similarly, those with a high mentor interest index were more likely to favour digital solutions (81.7% vs. 62.1%, p < 0.001). Table 3 . Preferences for mentoring formats and acceptance of digital solutions across professional groups. Professional Status Structured (%) Flexible (%) Digital Solution (%) Medical Student 25.3 74.7 87.2 Resident 32.4 67.6 80.6 Senior Resident (no specialization) 39.4 60.6 68.6 Senior Resident (with specialization) 41.5 58.5 80.5 Deputy Senior Physician 47.5 52.5 79.0 Senior Physician (and above) 30.4 69.6 72.5 Discussion Consistent with international studies our nationwide data confirm that mentoring in Switzerland remains largely unavailable despite being widely valued [9, 12, 13, 19, 23, 28]. Nearly 90% of the respondents rated the overall availability of mentoring programs as insufficient, consistent across all demographic and professional subgroups - including age, gender, specialization and career stage. 80% say that there are insufficient mentoring programs available and 79% would consider a digital tool as helpful. Approximately 33% of all participants reported that they had experience with earlier mentoring which aligns with current literature showing that approximately 30–36% of medical trainees have participated in or are currently enrolled in mentorship programs [9, 23]. This strong association between perceived importance of mentoring and both its expected benefit and willingness to mentor highlights a potential positive feedback loop: individuals who experience or recognize the value of mentoring are more inclined to contribute as mentors themselves. These findings indicate that improving access could not only enhance individual professional development but also foster a self-sustaining mentoring culture within Swiss medical education and practice. Career advice, training, research, and work-life balance were among the most selected themes. This also reflects studies showing that insufficient guidance is perceived as one of the most negative factors in medical careers [6]. Across most studies, the most frequently desired mentoring topic was career guidance—including career planning, specialty choice, and advancement—followed by research skills, professional development, and personal growth [2, 22]. Around 40% of the participants selected work–life balance as an important topic, which aligns with recent studies, especially focusing on women in academic medicine [13, 17]. Internationally, mentoring needs appear consistent across specialties and settings: surgical and primary-care trainees express a strong demand for structured mentorship to support career progress and reduce burnout [8, 9, 15, 24]. In Switzerland, programs offering career guidance or mentoring exist, such as “Coach my Career” by the FMH, which provides a one-time, fee-based career consultation with discounted rates for students, or mentoring programs by different societies. In addition, FMH regulations expect accredited teaching hospitals to offer mentoring opportunities as part of postgraduate medical training. Nevertheless, the persistent gap in mentoring availability may be explained by limited program capacity, lack of awareness, or poor mentor–mentee matching—particularly when mentors are assigned within hierarchical workplace structures where they also serve as superiors. The gender and seniority patterns in our sample mirror known structural inequities in medicine [29, 30]. Women were overrepresented in early-career stages and underrepresented in leadership roles, whereas both women and men reported high unmet needs. Although gender differences in perceived availability did not reach statistical significance, women consistently rated availability more critically and expressed greater openness to digital tools. It remains unclear whether the preference for digital mentoring reflects a genuine desire for more online interaction or simply results from practical considerations such as availability and geographic distance between mentor and mentee. Another interpretation is that “traditional” mentoring is assumed to be less available for women especially in surgical or highly competitive departments in middle-senior career parts [28] . Possible reasons are the general availability of mentoring, personal preferences regarding mentees and mentors and/or less available time due to family-related duties. The results regarding different needs and participants wishing for individual and flexible mentoring programs underscore the importance of individual mentoring, arguing against a one-size-fits-all model. The preference for structured mentoring increased with professional seniority, from 25% among medical students to nearly 50% among deputy senior physicians. This trend likely reflects greater recognition of mentoring benefits with increasing clinical and leadership responsibilities. While junior participants may rely more on informal or peer-based support, senior physicians appear to value structured frameworks that facilitate career progression and professional development. The absence of gender differences further suggests that mentoring is perceived as equally important across groups. These findings underline the need for tailored mentoring structures that evolve with career stage and professional demands. Considering this, we could argue that an open mentoring platform—allowing users to search according to their specific needs (e.g., career stage, specialty, personal circumstances)—could substantially improve the accessibility of mentoring. In Switzerland, such digital solutions are currently under development for example Medimile ™ , which aims to facilitate structured, needs-based mentor–mentee connections. Furthermore, approximately 80% considered an app or digital platform useful to facilitate access to mentoring. Younger, female, and student participants reported especially high acceptance. People who already had prior mentoring experience were less enthusiastic about an online mentoring option, possibly reflecting realistic expectations about the limitations of digital tools or the value of in-person relationships. Additionally, individuals without prior mentoring opportunities may view online options as helpful, given their limited access to mentoring so far. Together, these findings support hybrid models that combine app-based matching and resources with personal, longitudinal mentoring relationships. Limitations As this was a cross-sectional study, causal relationships between mentoring exposure, attitudes, and preferences cannot be inferred. A potential response bias cannot be excluded, as individuals with a particular interest in mentoring may have been more likely to participate in the survey. Furthermore, the open recruitment strategy led to some subgroup imbalances, such as an overrepresentation of respondents from the canton of Bern and German-speaking participants. This may limit the generalizability of the findings to all linguistic and regional contexts within Switzerland. However, the high internal consistency of the results across demographic and professional subgroups supports the robustness and reliability of the overall conclusions. Future research should evaluate the effectiveness of mentoring programs on outcomes such as burnout, career advancement, and professional identity formation. Longitudinal data are needed to better understand how mentoring relationships evolve and which formats are most effective at different career stages. Cost effectiveness could also be evaluated and will be essential for guiding institutional investment and policymaking. Conclusion Our study reveals a substantial, system-wide unmet need for mentoring across Swiss medicine. While existing programs demonstrate effectiveness, their reach remains limited. Interest in mentoring was high across all demographic groups, with career counseling, general mentoring, and specialization identified as key priorities. These findings highlight the need to implement more structured and accessible mentoring programs nationwide. Furthermore, the strong acceptance of digital platforms, particularly among younger and female respondents, underscores the potential of technology to expand and modernize mentoring in the Swiss medical field. Abbreviations ETH Zurich: German: Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule Zurich, English: Federal Institute of Technology Zurich; FMH: Swiss Medical Association; HFG: German: Humanforschungsgesetz, English: Swiss Human Research Act; REDCap: Research Electronic Data Capture; SWIMSA: Swiss Medical Students’ Association; USI Lugano: Università della Svizzera italiana; VSOA: Association of Swiss Assistant and Senior Physicians (VSAO) Declarations Authors’ contributions JAH participated in the design of the survey and drafted the manuscript and conceived the project idea. JFB participated in the design of the survey, conducted it and drafted the manuscript. JH consulted on the design of the survey. MT provided critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content. SH participated in the design of and conceived the project idea. All authors read and approved of the final manuscript. Funding This study is entirely funded by the University of Bern. Availability of data and materials The original dataset is available via the corresponding author. Ethics approval and consent to participate This study involved an anonymous survey without the collection of health-related personal data and therefore does not fall under the Swiss Human Research Act (HFG); no submission to the Cantonal Ethics Committee was required. The research was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and all applicable institutional guidelines. All participants were informed about the purpose of the study and provided electronic informed consent prior to beginning the questionnaire. No financial or material incentives were offered. Consent for publication Not applicable. Competing interests The authors declare that they have no competing interests. Authors’ information ORCID iD Julia Alessandra Holtmann 0009-0004-1036-0728 ORCID iD Jan-Friso Beck 0009-0002-0695-9792 ORCID iD Sonja Häckel 0000-0002-9415-6633 References Dahlberg ML, Byars-Winston A, editors. What is Mentoring? In: The Science of Effective Mentorship in STEMM. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2019. Sambunjak D, Straus SE, Marusić A. Mentoring in academic medicine: a systematic review. JAMA. 2006;296:1103–15. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.296.9.1103. Houchens N, Kuhn L, Ratz D, Su GL, Saint S. Committed to Success: A Structured Mentoring Program for Clinically Oriented Physicians. Mayo Clin Proc Innov Qual Outcomes. 2024;8:356–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mayocpiqo.2024.05.002. Jackson VA, Palepu A, Szalacha L, Caswell C, Carr PL, Inui T. “Having the right chemistry”: a qualitative study of mentoring in academic medicine. Acad Med J Assoc Am Med Coll. 2003;78:328–34. https://doi.org/10.1097/00001888-200303000-00020. Dandar V. Why faculty mentoring matters: a review of literature on the impact of faculty mentoring in academic medicine and research-based recommendations for developing effective mentoring programs. 2011. Sambunjak D, Straus SE, Marusic A. A systematic review of qualitative research on the meaning and characteristics of mentoring in academic medicine. J Gen Intern Med. 2010;25:72–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-009-1165-8. Valestrand EA, Hokstad LM, Schei E, Ofstad EH, Stenfors T, Kvernenes M. The liminal landscape of mentoring-Stories of physicians becoming mentors. Med Educ. 2023;57:1020–7. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.15117. Gupta S, Moosa D, MacPherson A, Allen C, Tamari IE. Effects of a 12-month multi-faceted mentoring intervention on knowledge, quality, and usage of spirometry in primary care: a before-and-after study. BMC Pulm Med. 2016;16:56. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12890-016-0220-6. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; Policy and Global Affairs; Board on Higher Education and Workforce; Committee on Effective Mentoring in STEMM. The Science of Effective Mentorship in STEMM. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2019. Frei E, Stamm M, Buddeberg-Fischer B. Mentoring programs for medical students--a review of the PubMed literature 2000-2008. BMC Med Educ. 2010;10:32. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6920-10-32. Williams JS, Walker RJ, Burgess KM, Shay LA, Schmidt S, Tsevat J, et al. Mentoring strategies to support diversity in research-focused junior faculty: A scoping review. J Clin Transl Sci. 2023;7:e21. https://doi.org/10.1017/cts.2022.474. Bhatnagar V, Diaz S, Bucur PA. The Need for More Mentorship in Medical School. Cureus. 2020;12:e7984. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.7984. Farkas AH, Bonifacino E, Turner R, Tilstra SA, Corbelli JA. Mentorship of Women in Academic Medicine: a Systematic Review. J Gen Intern Med. 2019;34:1322–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-019-04955-2. Walensky RP, Kim Y, Chang Y, Porneala BC, Bristol MN, Armstrong K, et al. The impact of active mentorship: results from a survey of faculty in the Department of Medicine at Massachusetts General Hospital. BMC Med Educ. 2018;18:108. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-018-1191-5. Silver CM, Yuce TK, Clarke CN, Schlick CJR, Khorfan R, Amortegui D, et al. Disparities in Mentorship and Implications for US Surgical Resident Education and Wellness. JAMA Surg. 2024;159:687–95. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2024.0533. Hostettler, S K E. FMH-Ärztestatistik 2023 – 40% ausländische Ärztinnen und Ärzte. Schweiz Ärzteztg. 2024;105(12):32–36 |. Shanafelt TD, West CP, Sinsky C, Trockel M, Tutty M, Wang H, et al. Changes in Burnout and Satisfaction With Work-Life Integration in Physicians and the General US Working Population Between 2011 and 2023. Mayo Clin Proc. 2025;100:1142–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mayocp.2024.11.031. General Medical Council. General Medical Council (2025) The state of medical education and practice in the UK: Workplace experiences 2025. Report. Scheiwiller et al. Survey on Expectations of medical students towards their future profession; Swiss Medical Students’ Association. 2023; Bern: swimsa. Winderbaum J, Coventry LL. The benefits, barriers and facilitators of mentoring programs for first-year doctors: A systematic review. Med Educ. 2024;58:687–96. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.15299. Kristo A, Petty EM. The Burden of Burnout and Importance of Mentorship for Preclinical Medical Students: Perspectives From a Public University Medical School. WMJ Off Publ State Med Soc Wis. 2024;123:182–8. Frei E, Stamm M, Buddeberg-Fischer B. Mentoring programs for medical students--a review of the PubMed literature 2000-2008. BMC Med Educ. 2010;10:32. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6920-10-32. Aagaard EM, Hauer KE. A cross-sectional descriptive study of mentoring relationships formed by medical students. J Gen Intern Med. 2003;18:298–302. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1525-1497.2003.20334.x. Woessner R, Honold M, Stehr SN, Steudel WI. Support and faculty mentoring programmes for medical students in Germany, Switzerland and Austria. Med Educ. 2000;34:480–2. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2923.2000.00406.x. Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, Payne J, Gonzalez N, Conde JG. Research electronic data capture (REDCap)—A metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform. 2009;42:377–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbi.2008.08.010. Kelley K, Clark B, Brown V, Sitzia J. Good practice in the conduct and reporting of survey research. Int J Qual Health Care J Int Soc Qual Health Care. 2003;15:261–6. https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzg031. Artino AR, La Rochelle JS, Dezee KJ, Gehlbach H. Developing questionnaires for educational research: AMEE Guide No. 87. Med Teach. 2014;36:463–74. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2014.889814. Shen MR, Tzioumis E, Andersen E, Wouk K, McCall R, Li W, et al. Impact of Mentoring on Academic Career Success for Women in Medicine: A Systematic Review. Acad Med J Assoc Am Med Coll. 2022;97:444–58. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000004563. Farkas AH, Bonifacino E, Turner R, Tilstra SA, Corbelli JA. Mentorship of Women in Academic Medicine: a Systematic Review. J Gen Intern Med. 2019;34:1322–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-019-04955-2. Mousa M, Boyle J, Skouteris H, Mullins AK, Currie G, Riach K, et al. Advancing women in healthcare leadership: A systematic review and meta-synthesis of multi-sector evidence on organisational interventions. EClinicalMedicine. 2021;39:101084. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eclinm.2021.101084. Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Supplementary Files SupplementalTable1.docx Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-8185446","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":563303507,"identity":"10e9cedf-4655-4282-81e1-f887b8813271","order_by":0,"name":"Julia Alessandra Holtmann","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Inselspital, University of Bern","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Julia","middleName":"Alessandra","lastName":"Holtmann","suffix":""},{"id":563303508,"identity":"53f83594-7eb6-428b-9d72-8517a93603c3","order_by":1,"name":"Jan-Friso Beck","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Inselspital, University of Bern","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Jan-Friso","middleName":"","lastName":"Beck","suffix":""},{"id":563303510,"identity":"b0a74499-16bb-4187-8dd8-fddb6099b1f4","order_by":2,"name":"Julia Hegy","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Bern","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Julia","middleName":"","lastName":"Hegy","suffix":""},{"id":563303518,"identity":"67d66642-3f3b-45be-af9e-4cba78c99048","order_by":3,"name":"Moritz Tannast","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Inselspital, University of Bern","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Moritz","middleName":"","lastName":"Tannast","suffix":""},{"id":563303524,"identity":"0baf57b5-55c1-4d92-a275-c004546713aa","order_by":4,"name":"Sonja Häckel","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Inselspital, University of Bern","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Sonja","middleName":"","lastName":"Häckel","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-11-23 12:38:23","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8185446/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-8185446/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":99189772,"identity":"495acf7d-788d-42c7-bf49-e11e4bf4f1d0","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-30 00:47:47","extension":"docx","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":272737,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"mentoringsurveyrevised251125.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8185446/v1/1be5d4304f6f04e6148d0704.docx"},{"id":99189771,"identity":"7f965789-491a-40b0-858f-10d669ae4bc7","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-30 00:47:47","extension":"json","order_by":1,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":7012,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"ceac341af7c94ecd99ebfbb503884839.json","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8185446/v1/0afcb2a793f92088418d6e79.json"},{"id":99318962,"identity":"6c00a938-962a-4808-b4d8-413b0b4ee76a","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-31 16:35:49","extension":"xml","order_by":2,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":114299,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"ceac341af7c94ecd99ebfbb5038848391enriched.xml","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8185446/v1/41f66eb231ec7269775bb8e2.xml"},{"id":99189776,"identity":"105ccfc6-4398-4c1f-b91c-0b635c3f7814","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-30 00:47:48","extension":"png","order_by":4,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":44564,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Onlinefloatimage1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8185446/v1/d9e2b33210c864cab8c82b6b.png"},{"id":99189779,"identity":"26c387d0-97ce-45fe-b3bc-d5603fcca541","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-30 00:47:48","extension":"xml","order_by":5,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":112863,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"ceac341af7c94ecd99ebfbb5038848391structuring.xml","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8185446/v1/3140ab0a9c4956d0c9b0da56.xml"},{"id":99189777,"identity":"8d349db5-e446-4cf2-8aa2-ebf7dea2feea","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-30 00:47:48","extension":"html","order_by":6,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":123492,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"earlyproof.html","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8185446/v1/4b33caa42d2fb6b0a19b0f95.html"},{"id":99189778,"identity":"bbad9fe6-29ea-434a-862a-32fc132ca0dc","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-30 00:47:48","extension":"jpeg","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":258864,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eA \u003c/strong\u003e- Most desired mentoring topics across all survey participants\u003cstrong\u003e B\u003c/strong\u003e–Medical Students \u003cstrong\u003eC\u003c/strong\u003e –Residents \u003cstrong\u003eD \u003c/strong\u003e–Advanced physicians/Specialists\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage1.jpeg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8185446/v1/e7ca55e03dbdfdbcb5d5b0e8.jpeg"},{"id":109613983,"identity":"053fee0f-8688-40f5-840e-b3227ed91e00","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-05-20 08:11:49","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":532582,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8185446/v1/0156c771-cca3-4c78-a261-979a5c53b265.pdf"},{"id":99316109,"identity":"bae52692-106b-4904-a363-5b414eeab9f4","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-31 16:27:45","extension":"docx","order_by":1,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":17785,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"SupplementalTable1.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8185446/v1/cf3f10c764a8cc56f5537955.docx"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Mentoring Needs and Preferences in Swiss Medical Education and Practice: A Cross- Sectional Study","fulltext":[{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eMentorship, a concept that originated in ancient Greece, has evolved within academia as a practice focused on guiding and influencing individual careers through role modeling, resource sharing, networking, and advice [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eToday, mentoring is seen as a supportive relationship in which more advanced individuals share their knowledge and experiences to help less experienced persons grow personally and professionally [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e]. Even though mentoring can occur in many forms, general mentoring is considered a relationship where the mentee has a person to talk to about career planning, experiences and problems that arise within or due to their field of work.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eEspecially in medicine, mentoring is increasingly recognized as important, as it has been shown to positively influence career development, confidence, overall job satisfaction as well as professional and personal growth of both mentor and mentee [\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR3 CR4 CR5 CR6\" citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn medicine, where young professionals often face high workloads and emotional strain, leading to feelings of being overwhelmed and increased dropout rates, mentoring has proven to be especially valuable [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e]. In addition to enhancing clinical knowledge, research productivity, and engagement, mentoring has also been shown to mitigate burnout and reduce feelings of isolation [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e]. Although various mentorship models have been proposed and recognized as key elements of professional development in academic medicine, their implementation remains inconsistent [\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR9 CR10\" citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003e]. Formal mentoring structures are often lacking, and access to effective mentorships is unequally distributed [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e]. Typical implementation barriers include a limited pool of qualified mentors, potential imbalances related to gender or ethnic dynamics, a lack of institutional support and time constraints [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e]. Studies have reported gender and ethnic differences in access to mentoring, with men being more likely to receive mentorship and to reporting positive career impacts from these relationships [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e15\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWithin the Swiss medical education system, which spans undergraduate to postgraduate training, approximately 12,000 medical students are distributed over seven universities across Switzerland, and 14,573 residents were in training in 2024 [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003e]. Insufficient guidance and mentorship during these formative years have consistently been identified as major factors that negatively influence career progression in medicine [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e]. In cases where no structured mentoring was offered or taken up, more cases of burnout among medical staff were reported \u003csup\u003e20,\u003c/sup\u003e[\u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e17\u003c/span\u003e]. Even though clear longitudinal data are still lacking, existing surveys show a heightened trend toward job turnover and an increased intent to leave patient care worldwide. [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e18\u003c/span\u003e],[\u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e17\u003c/span\u003e]. According to a Swiss wide survey, 30% of medical students are considering a reorientation of their profession due to their high workload and questionable work-life balance [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e]. In particular, first-year doctors report untenable and highly strenuous working conditions, that result in poor mental health and high attrition rates [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e20\u003c/span\u003e]. Furthermore, recent studies suggest that strong mentorship relationship may serve as a protective factor against burnout in preclinical medical students [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e21\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eHowever, despite its widely acknowledged benefits, formal mentoring programs remain inconsistently implemented across academic medicine, both internationally and in Switzerland [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e21\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e22\u003c/span\u003e]. International studies have shown that fewer than 40% of medical students report having a mentor, with physician-scientists more often involved in mentoring than purely clinical practitioners [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e23\u003c/span\u003e]. These findings align with a study conducted in Austria, Germany and Switzerland reporting that only 36% of medical students have access to mentoring [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e24\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Methods","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAim of the study\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe aim of this study is to quantify the availability of and degree of satisfaction with mentoring among Swiss medical students and physicians, and to assess the demand for structured mentoring as well as the perceived usefulness of a digital application to facilitate access. Considering the current literature we hypothesized that exposure to mentoring remains limited, that most students and physicians desire structured mentoring opportunities, and that a mobile application would be viewed as a helpful mechanism to improve access.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003eSurvey instrument and variables\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWe constructed a de novo online survey using Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap), a secure, web-based data collection platform [25]. The survey, developed in collaboration with Learning and Development at the University of Bern, contained 18 questions. The following areas were assessed: personal demographics, professional characteristics, own experiences with mentoring, own need for mentoring and personally relevant aspects of mentoring. The entire survey including all answer options can be seen in supplemental table 1.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003eSurvey sample and recruitment\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe study sample included two target populations: (1) medical students currently enrolled in a Swiss medical faculty and (2) physicians working in Switzerland, either in hospitals or in private practices. Physicians across all specialties, subspecialties, and career levels (residents, attending physicians, and senior consultants) were eligible to participate. A comprehensive national recruitment strategy was implemented to ensure wide and diverse participation. All seven Swiss medical faculties were contacted and invited to disseminate the survey through institutional mailing lists and internal communications. These faculties included the University of Basel, Bern, Geneva, Lausanne, Zurich, Università della Svizzera Italiana (USI, Lugano), and ETH Zurich (Bachelor program in Human Medicine, in collaboration with the University of Zurich and University Hospital Zurich).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTo reach medical students and young physicians, the Swiss Medical Students’ Association (SWIMSA) and the Association of Swiss Assistant and Senior Physicians (VSAO) were engaged to support dissemination via newsletters, social media posts, and internal platforms. The survey was also shared by the Swiss Medical Association (FMH) and numerous Swiss professional specialty societies (e.g. Swiss Orthopedics, Swiss Society of Internal Medicine, Swiss Society of Surgery), who were asked to distribute the survey among their members. Participants were recruited through multiple channels, including email invitations, printed flyers with QR codes posted in hospitals and university buildings, and social media posts on LinkedIn, Instagram, and Facebook.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003eSurvey administration\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRecruitment took place between November 2024 and March 2025. We sent 4 survey reminders and closed the survey by the end of March 2025 with a total of 672 responses. Our sample size is considered sufficient for national cross-sectional survey research in medical education, allowing for subgroup analyses and reliable insights across demographics and career levels [26, 27].\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003eEthics approval and consent to participate\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis study involved an anonymous survey without collection of health-related personal data and therefore does not fall under the Swiss Human Research Act (HFG); no submission to the Cantonal Ethics Committee was required. All participants were informed about the purpose of the study and provided electronic informed consent prior to beginning the questionnaire. No financial or material incentives were offered.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003eStatistical analysis\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDescriptive statistics were calculated to summarize participant demographics, mentoring experience, and interest in structured mentoring programs. Frequencies and percentages were reported for categorical variables, whereas means, standard deviations, medians, and modes were reported for continuous or ordinal variables where appropriate. Group comparisons were conducted using via chi-square tests for categorical data and Mann–Whitney U tests for nonparametric ordinal comparisons. A one-sample t-test was used to compare mentoring satisfaction ratings against the neutral midpoint. To assess associations between key variables such as mentoring experience, the importance of mentoring, and app acceptance, correlation analyses (Pearson’s or Spearman’s as appropriate) were performed. Binomial tests were used to assess differences in proportions against hypothesized benchmarks (e.g. 50%).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAn alternative interest index (0-3) was created, combining three generally answered variables: expectation of professional improvement through mentoring programs, high perceived importance of mentoring programs (score≥ 4), and willingness to participate as a mentor. Correlations between the three variables were further examined via Pearson 2-tailed correlation calculations. All six resulting correlation values were significant at either the 0.05 level or at the 0.01 level.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAll the statistical tests were two-tailed with a significant level of p \u0026lt; 0.05. Data analysis was performed using IBM SPSS Statistics (Version 31).\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Results","content":"\u003ch2\u003eParticipant characteristics\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eA total of 548 participants provided complete demographic data (Table 1). Most respondents were aged 25\u0026ndash;38 years (46%), and 62.5% identified as female. Most participants reported German as their primary language (86.6%), followed by French (9.5%), English (2.7%), and Italian (1.1%). The participants represented all career stages, with 30.3% medical students, 19.1% residents, and 25.5% senior physicians or above. The most common medical specialties were internal medicine (24.7%), anesthesiology (16.5%), and orthopedics and trauma surgery (13.4%). Most participants were located in Bern (70%), followed by Z\u0026uuml;rich (6%) and other cantons (24%). Among the students, the largest proportion were enrolled at the University of Bern (28.7%), followed by ETH Z\u0026uuml;rich (21.3%) and the University of Fribourg (15.9%; Table 1).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003e1\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003e.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eDemographic and professional characteristics of the participants (n = 548)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"100%\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 25px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eVariable\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCategory\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eN\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e%\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 25px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAge Group\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt; 18\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 25px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e18\u0026ndash;24\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e121\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e22.1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 25px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e25\u0026ndash;31\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e115\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e21.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 25px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e32\u0026ndash;38\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e136\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e24.8\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 25px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e38\u0026ndash;44\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e66\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e12.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 25px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026gt; 44\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e107\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e19.5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 25px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGender\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFemale\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e337\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e62.5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 25px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMale\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e198\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e36.7\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 25px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDiverse/Other\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 25px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo response\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 25px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLanguage\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGerman\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e473\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e86.6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 25px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFrench\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e52\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9.5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 25px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eItalian\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 25px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEnglish\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e15\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.7\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 25px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eProfessional Status\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMedical students\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e165\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e30.28\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 25px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eResidents\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e104\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e19.08\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 25px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSenior residents without completed specialization (FMH)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e34\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6.24\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 25px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSenior residents with completed specialization (FMH)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e41\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7.52\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 25px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDeputy senior physican\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e62\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11.38\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 25px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSenior physician and above\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e139\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e25.5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 25px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSpecialization\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eInternal medicine\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e92\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e24.7\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 25px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAnesthesiology\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e61\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e16.5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 25px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOrthopedics and trauma surgery\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e50\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e13.4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 25px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOthers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e159\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e45.4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 25px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLocations and\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eworkplaces (canton)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBern\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e263\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e70.1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 25px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eZ\u0026uuml;rich\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e22\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.9\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 25px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOthers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e90\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e24\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 25px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUniversity\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUniversity of Bern\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e47\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e28.7\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 25px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eETH Z\u0026uuml;rich\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e35\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e21.3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 25px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUniversity of Fribourg\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e26\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e15.9\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 25px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOthers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e56\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e34.1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMentoring Experience and Satisfaction: Insufficient Availability of Mentoring Programs in Switzerland\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAmong the 530 valid responses, only 32.5% had previous mentoring experience. Among those, satisfaction has been shown to be significantly above neutral (mean = 3.44/5; SD = 1.217; \u003cem\u003et\u003c/em\u003e(162) = 9.812; \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; 0.001), with 55.8% rating their experience as positive. Overall, 89.6% considered existing mentoring opportunities to be insufficient, whereas only 10.4% perceived existing mentoring possibilities as being sufficient (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; 0.001, binomial test). Importantly, 94.5% of all the respondents expected mentoring to potentially have a positive impact on their career. The participants with mentoring experience rated the importance of mentoring higher than did those without (80.0% vs. 69.2%, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; 0.001). The perception of insufficient mentoring was consistent across all professional roles and genders. Women tended to rate availability more critically than men (92.1% vs. 86.8%, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e = 0.054). Mentoring importance was positively correlated with perceived benefit (\u003cem\u003er\u003c/em\u003e = .25, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .01) and willingness to mentor (\u003cem\u003er\u003c/em\u003e = .14, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .01).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003eMentoring Needs: Most preferred Topic of Mentoring Programs is Career Advice\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eInterest in mentoring programs was consistently high across all professional roles, genders, and age categories. Chi-square analyses revealed no statistically significant differences between professional groups (\u0026chi;\u0026sup2;(5) = 6.424, p = 0.267; Gamma = \u0026ndash;0.023). A nonsignificant tendency towards greater interest among female respondents was observed (\u0026chi;\u0026sup2;(1) = 2.770, p = 0.096, \u0026phi; = \u0026ndash;0.072), whereas no age effect was found (\u0026chi;\u0026sup2;(1) = 0.002, p = 0.961, \u0026phi; = \u0026ndash;0.002). For example, high interest was reported among both medical students (87.9%) and senior physicians (85.6%), as were intermediate career levels. A significant association was found between the perceived importance of mentoring and both its expected benefit (r = 0.25, p \u0026lt; 0.01) and willingness to mentor (r = 0.14, p \u0026lt; 0.01).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe analyses revealed two topics with significant group differences, thus p \u0026lt; .05. Across all career stages, career advice and research opportunities emerged as the most frequently desired mentoring topics. Interest in career advice was particularly high among residents (80.2%) and specialists (79.7%) compared with students (69.6%; \u0026chi;\u0026sup2; = 8.31, p = .016). Similarly, demand for mentoring on research possibilities increased with seniority (44.3% of students, 49.4% of residents, and 57.0% of specialists; \u0026chi;\u0026sup2; = 7.69, p = .019). Other topics\u0026mdash;such as education/specialization, networking, clinical skills, and work\u0026ndash;life balance\u0026mdash;showed no significant differences between groups (p \u0026gt; .05), suggesting broadly shared mentoring needs across career levels (Figure 1 A\u0026ndash;D and table 2).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eTable 2.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e Differences in mentoring topics interest across all career levels\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"3\" cellpadding=\"0\"\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cu\u003eMentoring topic\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cu\u003eMedical students (n = 309)\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cu\u003eResidents\u0026nbsp;\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cu\u003e(n = 81)\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cu\u003eSenior residents and above (n = 207)\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cu\u003e\u0026chi;\u0026sup2;\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cu\u003ep\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003eCareer advice\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003e69.6%\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003e80.2% \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003e79.7%\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003e8.31\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003e.016*\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003eGeneral mentoring\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003e61.2%\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003e56.8%\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003e60.9%\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003e0.54\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003e.765\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003eResearch possibilities\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003e44.3%\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003e49.4%\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003e57.0%\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003e7.96\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003e.019*\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003eEducation/specialization\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003e56.6%\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003e55.6%\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003e50.7%\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003e1.79\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003e.408\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003eNetworking\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003e47.6%\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003e50.6%\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003e56.0%\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003e3.56\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003e.169\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003eClinical skills\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003e51.5%\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003e50.6%\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003e45.4%\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003e1.88\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003e.390\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003eWork-Life balance\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003e42.7%\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003e39.5%\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003e44.4%\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003e0.59\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003e.746\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003eFellowships\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003e37.9%\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003e46.9%\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003e45.4%\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003e3.95\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003e.139\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003eProfession and family\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003e35.0%\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003e38.3%\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003e37.2%\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003e0.45\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003e.799\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003eReorientation\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003e21.0%\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003e24.7%\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003e29.5%\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003e4.77\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cu\u003e.092\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePreferred Mentoring Format: Flexible and Digital\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eA significant difference in mentoring preferences was found across professional groups (\u0026chi;\u0026sup2;(5) = 12.7, p = 0.026), with the preference for structured mentoring increasing with seniority\u0026mdash;from 25% among medical students to nearly 50% among deputy senior physicians. No gender differences were observed (p = 0.50; Table 3).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAmong all participants, 79.6% considered a mentoring app to be potentially useful. App acceptance was significantly greater among younger (86.0% vs. 74.6%, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e = 0.001) and female participants, than among male participants (84.7% vs. 70.2%, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; 0.001). The younger participants were those aged under 35 years, and the older participants were those aged 35 years and older. Higher professional status has been shown to be a negative predictor of acceptance of a digital approach. Participants without prior mentoring experience showed greater app acceptance than those with experience (83.4% vs. 71.6%, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e = 0.001). Similarly, those with a high mentor interest index were more likely to favour digital solutions (81.7% vs. 62.1%, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; 0.001).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 3\u003c/strong\u003e. Preferences for mentoring formats and acceptance of digital solutions across professional groups.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"637\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eProfessional Status\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eStructured (%)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFlexible (%)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDigital Solution (%)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMedical Student\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e25.3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e74.7\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e87.2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eResident\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e32.4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e67.6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e80.6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSenior Resident (no specialization)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e39.4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e60.6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e68.6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSenior Resident (with specialization)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e41.5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e58.5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e80.5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDeputy Senior Physician\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e47.5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e52.5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e79.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSenior Physician (and above)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e30.4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e69.6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e72.5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e"},{"header":"Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eConsistent with international studies our nationwide data confirm that mentoring in Switzerland remains largely unavailable despite being widely valued [9, 12, 13, 19, 23, 28]. \u0026nbsp;Nearly 90% of the respondents rated the overall availability of mentoring programs as insufficient, consistent across all demographic and professional subgroups - including age, gender, specialization and career stage. 80% say that there are insufficient mentoring programs available and 79% would consider a digital tool as helpful. Approximately 33% of all participants reported that they had experience with earlier mentoring which aligns with current literature showing that approximately 30–36% of medical trainees have participated in or are currently enrolled in mentorship programs [9, 23]. This strong association between perceived importance of mentoring and both its expected benefit and willingness to mentor highlights a potential positive feedback loop: individuals who experience or recognize the value of mentoring are more inclined to contribute as mentors themselves. These findings indicate that improving access could not only enhance individual professional development but also foster a self-sustaining mentoring culture within Swiss medical education and practice. Career advice, training, research, and work-life balance were among the most selected themes. This also reflects studies showing that insufficient guidance is perceived as one of the most negative factors in medical careers [6]. Across most studies, the most frequently desired mentoring topic was career guidance—including career planning, specialty choice, and advancement—followed by research skills, professional development, and personal growth [2, 22]. Around 40% \u0026nbsp;of the participants selected work–life balance as an important topic, which aligns with recent studies, especially focusing on women in academic medicine [13, 17]. \u0026nbsp;Internationally, mentoring needs appear consistent across specialties and settings: surgical and primary-care trainees express a strong demand for structured mentorship to support career progress and reduce burnout [8, 9, 15, 24]. In Switzerland, programs offering career guidance or mentoring exist, such as “Coach my Career” by the FMH, which provides a one-time, fee-based career consultation with discounted rates for students, or mentoring programs by different societies. In addition, FMH regulations expect accredited teaching hospitals to offer mentoring opportunities as part of postgraduate medical training. Nevertheless, the persistent gap in mentoring availability may be explained by limited program capacity, lack of awareness, or poor mentor–mentee matching—particularly when mentors are assigned within hierarchical workplace structures where they also serve as superiors. The gender and seniority patterns in our sample mirror known structural inequities in medicine [29, 30]. Women were overrepresented in early-career stages and underrepresented in leadership roles, whereas both women and men reported high unmet needs. Although gender differences in perceived availability did not reach statistical significance, women consistently rated availability more critically and expressed greater openness to digital tools. It remains unclear whether the preference for digital mentoring reflects a genuine desire for more online interaction or simply results from practical considerations such as availability and geographic distance between mentor and mentee. Another interpretation is that “traditional” mentoring is assumed to be less available for women especially in surgical or highly competitive departments in middle-senior career parts [28] . Possible reasons are the general availability of mentoring, personal preferences regarding mentees and mentors and/or less available time due to family-related duties. \u0026nbsp;The results regarding different needs and participants wishing for individual and flexible mentoring programs underscore the importance of individual mentoring, arguing against a one-size-fits-all model. The preference for structured mentoring increased with professional seniority, from 25% among medical students to nearly 50% among deputy senior physicians. This trend likely reflects greater recognition of mentoring benefits with increasing clinical and leadership responsibilities. While junior participants may rely more on informal or peer-based support, senior physicians appear to value structured frameworks that facilitate career progression and professional development. The absence of gender differences further suggests that mentoring is perceived as equally important across groups. These findings underline the need for tailored mentoring structures that evolve with career stage and professional demands. Considering this, we could argue that an open mentoring platform—allowing users to search according to their specific needs (e.g., career stage, specialty, personal circumstances)—could substantially improve the accessibility of mentoring. In Switzerland, such digital solutions are currently under development for example Medimile\u003cem\u003e™\u003c/em\u003e, which aims to facilitate structured, needs-based mentor–mentee connections. Furthermore, approximately 80% considered an app or digital platform useful to facilitate access to mentoring. Younger, female, and student participants reported especially high acceptance. \u0026nbsp;People who already had prior mentoring experience were less enthusiastic about an online mentoring option, possibly reflecting realistic expectations about the limitations of digital tools or the value of in-person relationships. Additionally, individuals without prior mentoring opportunities may view online options as helpful, given their limited access to mentoring so far. Together, these findings support hybrid models that combine app-based matching and resources with personal, longitudinal mentoring relationships.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eLimitations\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAs this was a cross-sectional study, causal relationships between mentoring exposure, attitudes, and preferences cannot be inferred. A potential response bias cannot be excluded, as individuals with a particular interest in mentoring may have been more likely to participate in the survey. Furthermore, the open recruitment strategy led to some subgroup imbalances, such as an overrepresentation of respondents from the canton of Bern and German-speaking participants. This may limit the generalizability of the findings to all linguistic and regional contexts within Switzerland. However, the high internal consistency of the results across demographic and professional subgroups supports the robustness and reliability of the overall conclusions. Future research should evaluate the effectiveness of mentoring programs on outcomes such as burnout, career advancement, and professional identity formation. Longitudinal data are needed to better understand how mentoring relationships evolve and which formats are most effective at different career stages. Cost effectiveness could also be evaluated and will be essential for guiding institutional investment and policymaking.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eOur study reveals a substantial, system-wide unmet need for mentoring across Swiss medicine. While existing programs demonstrate effectiveness, their reach remains limited. Interest in mentoring was high across all demographic groups, with career counseling, general mentoring, and specialization identified as key priorities. These findings highlight the need to implement more structured and accessible mentoring programs nationwide. Furthermore, the strong acceptance of digital platforms, particularly among younger and female respondents, underscores the potential of technology to expand and modernize mentoring in the Swiss medical field.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Abbreviations","content":"\u003cp\u003eETH Zurich: German: Eidgen\u0026ouml;ssische Technische Hochschule Zurich, English: Federal Institute of Technology Zurich; FMH: Swiss Medical Association; HFG: German: Humanforschungsgesetz, English: Swiss Human Research Act; REDCap: Research Electronic Data Capture; SWIMSA: Swiss Medical Students\u0026rsquo; Association; USI Lugano: Universit\u0026agrave; della Svizzera italiana; VSOA: Association of Swiss Assistant and Senior Physicians (VSAO)\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthors’ contributions\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eJAH participated in the design of the survey and drafted the manuscript and conceived the project idea. JFB participated in the design of the survey, conducted it and drafted the manuscript. JH consulted on the design of the survey. MT provided critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content. SH participated in the design of and conceived the project idea. All authors read and approved of the final manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFunding\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis study is entirely funded by the University of Bern.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAvailability of data and materials\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe original dataset is available via the corresponding author.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEthics approval and consent to participate\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis study involved an anonymous survey without the collection of health-related personal data and therefore does not fall under the Swiss Human Research Act (HFG); no submission to the Cantonal Ethics Committee was required. The research was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and all applicable institutional guidelines. All participants were informed about the purpose of the study and provided electronic informed consent prior to beginning the questionnaire. No financial or material incentives were offered.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConsent for publication\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNot applicable.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCompeting interests\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe authors declare that they have no competing interests.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthors’ information\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eORCID iD Julia Alessandra Holtmann 0009-0004-1036-0728\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eORCID iD Jan-Friso Beck 0009-0002-0695-9792\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eORCID iD Sonja Häckel 0000-0002-9415-6633\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDahlberg ML, Byars-Winston A, editors. What is Mentoring? In: The Science of Effective Mentorship in STEMM. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2019.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSambunjak D, Straus SE, Marusić A. Mentoring in academic medicine: a systematic review. JAMA. 2006;296:1103\u0026ndash;15. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.296.9.1103.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHouchens N, Kuhn L, Ratz D, Su GL, Saint S. Committed to Success: A Structured Mentoring Program for Clinically Oriented Physicians. Mayo Clin Proc Innov Qual Outcomes. 2024;8:356\u0026ndash;63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mayocpiqo.2024.05.002.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJackson VA, Palepu A, Szalacha L, Caswell C, Carr PL, Inui T. \u0026ldquo;Having the right chemistry\u0026rdquo;: a qualitative study of mentoring in academic medicine. Acad Med J Assoc Am Med Coll. 2003;78:328\u0026ndash;34. https://doi.org/10.1097/00001888-200303000-00020.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDandar V. Why faculty mentoring matters: a review of literature on the impact of faculty mentoring in academic medicine and research-based recommendations for developing effective mentoring programs. 2011.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSambunjak D, Straus SE, Marusic A. A systematic review of qualitative research on the meaning and characteristics of mentoring in academic medicine. J Gen Intern Med. 2010;25:72\u0026ndash;8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-009-1165-8.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eValestrand EA, Hokstad LM, Schei E, Ofstad EH, Stenfors T, Kvernenes M. The liminal landscape of mentoring-Stories of physicians becoming mentors. Med Educ. 2023;57:1020\u0026ndash;7. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.15117.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGupta S, Moosa D, MacPherson A, Allen C, Tamari IE. Effects of a 12-month multi-faceted mentoring intervention on knowledge, quality, and usage of spirometry in primary care: a before-and-after study. BMC Pulm Med. 2016;16:56. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12890-016-0220-6.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eNational Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; Policy and Global Affairs; Board on Higher Education and Workforce; Committee on Effective Mentoring in STEMM. The Science of Effective Mentorship in STEMM. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2019.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFrei E, Stamm M, Buddeberg-Fischer B. Mentoring programs for medical students--a review of the PubMed literature 2000-2008. BMC Med Educ. 2010;10:32. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6920-10-32.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWilliams JS, Walker RJ, Burgess KM, Shay LA, Schmidt S, Tsevat J, et al. Mentoring strategies to support diversity in research-focused junior faculty: A scoping review. J Clin Transl Sci. 2023;7:e21. https://doi.org/10.1017/cts.2022.474.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBhatnagar V, Diaz S, Bucur PA. The Need for More Mentorship in Medical School. Cureus. 2020;12:e7984. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.7984.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFarkas AH, Bonifacino E, Turner R, Tilstra SA, Corbelli JA. Mentorship of Women in Academic Medicine: a Systematic Review. J Gen Intern Med. 2019;34:1322\u0026ndash;9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-019-04955-2.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWalensky RP, Kim Y, Chang Y, Porneala BC, Bristol MN, Armstrong K, et al. The impact of active mentorship: results from a survey of faculty in the Department of Medicine at Massachusetts General Hospital. BMC Med Educ. 2018;18:108. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-018-1191-5.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSilver CM, Yuce TK, Clarke CN, Schlick CJR, Khorfan R, Amortegui D, et al. Disparities in Mentorship and Implications for US Surgical Resident Education and Wellness. JAMA Surg. 2024;159:687\u0026ndash;95. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2024.0533.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHostettler, S K E. FMH-\u0026Auml;rztestatistik 2023 \u0026ndash; 40% ausl\u0026auml;ndische \u0026Auml;rztinnen und \u0026Auml;rzte. Schweiz \u0026Auml;rzteztg. 2024;105(12):32\u0026ndash;36 |.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eShanafelt TD, West CP, Sinsky C, Trockel M, Tutty M, Wang H, et al. Changes in Burnout and Satisfaction With Work-Life Integration in Physicians and the General US Working Population Between 2011 and 2023. Mayo Clin Proc. 2025;100:1142\u0026ndash;58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mayocp.2024.11.031.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGeneral Medical Council. General Medical Council (2025) The state of medical education and practice in the UK: Workplace experiences 2025. Report.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eScheiwiller et al. Survey on Expectations of medical students towards their future profession; Swiss Medical Students\u0026rsquo; Association. 2023; Bern: swimsa.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWinderbaum J, Coventry LL. The benefits, barriers and facilitators of mentoring programs for first-year doctors: A systematic review. Med Educ. 2024;58:687\u0026ndash;96. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.15299.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKristo A, Petty EM. The Burden of Burnout and Importance of Mentorship for Preclinical Medical Students: Perspectives From a Public University Medical School. WMJ Off Publ State Med Soc Wis. 2024;123:182\u0026ndash;8.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFrei E, Stamm M, Buddeberg-Fischer B. Mentoring programs for medical students--a review of the PubMed literature 2000-2008. BMC Med Educ. 2010;10:32. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6920-10-32.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAagaard EM, Hauer KE. A cross-sectional descriptive study of mentoring relationships formed by medical students. J Gen Intern Med. 2003;18:298\u0026ndash;302. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1525-1497.2003.20334.x.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWoessner R, Honold M, Stehr SN, Steudel WI. Support and faculty mentoring programmes for medical students in Germany, Switzerland and Austria. Med Educ. 2000;34:480\u0026ndash;2. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2923.2000.00406.x.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHarris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, Payne J, Gonzalez N, Conde JG. Research electronic data capture (REDCap)\u0026mdash;A metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform. 2009;42:377\u0026ndash;81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbi.2008.08.010.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKelley K, Clark B, Brown V, Sitzia J. Good practice in the conduct and reporting of survey research. Int J Qual Health Care J Int Soc Qual Health Care. 2003;15:261\u0026ndash;6. https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzg031.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eArtino AR, La Rochelle JS, Dezee KJ, Gehlbach H. Developing questionnaires for educational research: AMEE Guide No. 87. Med Teach. 2014;36:463\u0026ndash;74. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2014.889814.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eShen MR, Tzioumis E, Andersen E, Wouk K, McCall R, Li W, et al. Impact of Mentoring on Academic Career Success for Women in Medicine: A Systematic Review. Acad Med J Assoc Am Med Coll. 2022;97:444\u0026ndash;58. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000004563.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFarkas AH, Bonifacino E, Turner R, Tilstra SA, Corbelli JA. Mentorship of Women in Academic Medicine: a Systematic Review. J Gen Intern Med. 2019;34:1322\u0026ndash;9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-019-04955-2.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMousa M, Boyle J, Skouteris H, Mullins AK, Currie G, Riach K, et al. Advancing women in healthcare leadership: A systematic review and meta-synthesis of multi-sector evidence on organisational interventions. EClinicalMedicine. 2021;39:101084. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eclinm.2021.101084.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Mentoring, Education, Medica, Surveys, Cross-Sectiona, Studies, Switzerland, Work-lif, balance, Caree, choice, Burnout, Professional, Networking","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8185446/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-8185446/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eBackground\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eStructured mentoring can support career development, well-being, and equality in medicine. However, many studies report limited access to mentoring opportunities. Therefore, this study investigates current mentoring availability, the demand for structured programs, and the openness toward digital mentoring offers in the Swiss medical field.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eMethods\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eA national cross-sectional online survey was conducted between November 2024 and March 2025 via REDCap. The participants included medical students and physicians at various stages of their careers. Mentoring experience, interest in structured mentoring, preferred mentoring topics, and openness to a digital platform were assessed. Descriptive statistics and subgroup analyses were performed.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eResults\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eA total of 548 participants completed the survey. Among them, 89.6% perceived the current mentoring availability as insufficient, and 89.2% expressed strong interest in structured mentoring programs. Thematic needs were diverse, with an average of 5.3 of 11 desired mentoring topics per participant. The most frequently selected topics were career planning, general mentoring, specialization, education and research possibilities and specialty choice. Demand was consistent across gender, age, and professional level. A digital solution was considered to be useful by 79.6% of the participants, with higher acceptance among younger and female respondents.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eConclusion\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study confirms a substantial gap between mentoring needs and current offerings in Switzerland. There is a clear demand for structured programs and broad support for digital mentoring solutions. The implementation of accessible, structured, and theme-diverse mentoring\u0026mdash;potentially using digital platforms\u0026mdash;may help address this unmet need in the medical community.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Mentoring Needs and Preferences in Swiss Medical Education and Practice: A Cross- Sectional Study","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-12-30 00:47:37","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8185446/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"9a8d17c7-3f39-4806-a0a6-9bbfe5e8428e","owner":[],"postedDate":"December 30th, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[{"type":"decision","content":"Withdrawn","date":"2026-05-20T07:53:35+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2026-05-20T08:10:01+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2025-12-30 00:47:37","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-8185446","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-8185446","identity":"rs-8185446","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"8U1c8b4HqxoKbykW_rLl7","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}